Spanish Judges Liken File Sharing to Lending Books

[Wicky_42]

Just think for a second about how libraries work - and yet writers keep going

How come record companies argue that file sharing is "destroying the industry", are they really just being ultra-greedy?

Maybe they are, but then again, people do still physically buy CDs.

They say that, but is the music industry showing any sign of collapsing? Exactly.

The point is, with libraries people can borrow stuff at their leisure, risk-free, and if they like it they have the option of buying it or a sequel later. Honestly, the same applies to file-sharing; sure, some people will only every share and never contribute to the market, but the majority will buy at least something, normally something that they know they will enjoy. Which is what your last sentence basically says.

Surely it's more like multiplying books and handing them out? When you lend a book, you no longer have it until it's given back to you. File sharing is like reaching into a magic hat and pulling out infinite supplies of the same thing.

But with a cost-free lending system, you could always re-borrow something if you wanted it again. It's not like you keep EVERY shared game installed and running all the time - hell, I barely keep games I've completed installed for long (unless they have multiplayer, of course). It would make no difference to me if I was lending them out, as the vast majority of the time I'm not using ANY of my game collection.

Having it shared digitally just means you don't run the risk of someone else having it and having to wait a week for it to get recalled (or, as was the case with a course book at uni, no risk of the librarians loosing the ONLY copy of an uncommon book, required for a module).

Then again, there's plenty of books I've read without paying for. Sure the physical copy's no longer in my possession but if I wanted it I could go and get it again for no cost. That's practically the point of libraries - to make it so you don't have to pay for books!

Technically you pay for the use of libraries through taxes. Just saying.

But not on a per-loan basis, it's all part of council tax. Presumably a little filters back to the publishers for the original purchase of the book, but I don't think there's any sort of licensing agreement between the library and each publisher it holds works from, and I seriously doubt that the publisher gets ANY cash from you reading their books at a library - "zomg, that's book piracy!!11!"

Internet file sharing's exactly the same situation, just made more prolific by ease of reproduction and less legal by what really are outdated copyright laws.

 

[conflictofinterests]

As to the linkage of book-lending to file sharing, I can see the semblance. While you may not have a physical copy of the book you lent out anymore, you do have the memory of the information contained therein. Books have no value save for the information they contain, and so long as you remember it to your satisfaction, you could lend it out to as many people as you want producing an effect similar in nature if not scope to file sharing. Why would one draw a line through the act of lending, keeping legal the practices common half a century ago and banning the ones that have developed since?

 

[Danpascooch]

I hope some big wigs in the industries followed this case. And I hope they decide to end piracy since obviously they aren't going to find any legal help whatsoever. Just shut her down. Oh that big game you have been waiting for is set to be released next month? Haha not anymore. Maybe that would put an end to this piracy doesn't hurt anyone nonsense when it starts hurting all of us.

I don't like to insult people, so I won't, but I feel like I would be doing you a disservice if I didn't let you know that this post makes no sense.

First of all, no "bigwig" wants piracy, you've heard of DRM right? (you can't really use this site without hearing about it constantly) that's them trying to end it.

Secondly, if they prevented piracy by not releasing games anymore, how would that be beneficial to them? They'd be saying "HAHA! No more piracy....wait...FUCK! WE HAVE NO SOURCE OF INCOME ANYMORE!!!"

Your solution is akin to ending AIDS by blowing up the Earth, sure it ends it, but it destroys everything that made it relevant, and caused a much more massive problem than it solved.

 

[Danpascooch]

Just think for a second about how libraries work - and yet writers keep going

How come record companies argue that file sharing is "destroying the industry", are they really just being ultra-greedy?

Maybe they are, but then again, people do still physically buy CDs.

I support piracy, but Libraries are not the same thing.

1.) A library has to pay for a book initially
2.) (this is the main point) That book can only be lent out to ONE person at a time, the Library doesn't make infinite copies of the book that can be lent out simultaneously for free.

 

[oranger]

Aaaand another blow against those who would destroy the ideal of the free market.
So many people do not understand the term, but at least in one country, the words still have meaning.

 

[Marmooset]

What an interesting take on it. Kudos to these Spanish judges, there may yet be some people in authority who see sense.

Wow, I really don't know what to say. Who new the judges in Spain were so logical?

This just in: Spanish judges have also ruled that running gun battles are to be legally treated as paintball games - the only difference being the medium of exchange...

So...does that make running gun battle legal or paintball games illegal?

Good question. Probably depends upon whether the Spanish paintball industry or armed thug industry has a stronger lobby.

 

[freakonaleash]

Well God damn it.

Frankly, I don't see it as lending books, unless you could magically xerox an entire book in five minutes indefinitely for all of your friends whenever you felt like it.

Thats kinda what I was thinking.

 

[squid5580]

I hope some big wigs in the industries followed this case. And I hope they decide to end piracy since obviously they aren't going to find any legal help whatsoever. Just shut her down. Oh that big game you have been waiting for is set to be released next month? Haha not anymore. Maybe that would put an end to this piracy doesn't hurt anyone nonsense when it starts hurting all of us.

I don't like to insult people, so I won't, but I feel like I would be doing you a disservice if I didn't let you know that this post makes no sense.

First of all, no "bigwig" wants piracy, you've heard of DRM right? (you can't really use this site without hearing about it constantly) that's them trying to end it.

Secondly, if they prevented piracy by not releasing games anymore, how would that be beneficial to them? They'd be saying "HAHA! No more piracy....wait...FUCK! WE HAVE NO SOURCE OF INCOME ANYMORE!!!"

Your solution is akin to ending AIDS by blowing up the Earth, sure it ends it, but it destroys everything that made it relevant, and caused a much more massive problem than it solved.

I am well aware of how that would play out. I know that you would be cutting of the leg in hopes of saving the toe. I also know it would never happen. I just find it somewhat depressing that this is the only hope they have left of ending piracy. And frankly incorporating ridiculous DRMs is not doing them much more good than just closing the doors down. Just look what it has done to Ubisoft's reputation.

 

[WickedArtist]

I'm curious, how does file sharing different from piracy?

Isn't piracy just a form of file sharing?

I don't disagree with the judges' ruling, but I am ambivalent about their absolution of file sharing as a harmless form of lending. All this talk about the freedom of the internet reeks of something to me. I am an advocate of freedom anywhere, the Internet being no exception; the freedom to talk, to share ideas, to share information, to socialize, to entertain... but not the freedom to steal. That's right, all this talk of freedom and lending reeks of an excuse for getting stuff for free even when they're not meant to be free.

Throwing digital media out there for everyone to take a copy of and enjoy as if they owned it bears little resemblance (at least in my opinion) to lending. I don't want or intend to argue the reasoning behind pirates and piracy, but that's how it looks like to me. I also believe that people should earn what they own, not steal it.

Again, I'm not saying I disagree with the verdict. I do agree with it, just for different reasons, as is my stance on file sharing. I'm not against it, but freedom is one thing, stealing is another, and file sharing can achieve both. I think it's important to make that distinction.

 

[Wicky_42]

Just think for a second about how libraries work - and yet writers keep going

How come record companies argue that file sharing is "destroying the industry", are they really just being ultra-greedy?

Maybe they are, but then again, people do still physically buy CDs.

I support piracy, but Libraries are not the same thing.

1.) A library has to pay for a book initially
2.) (this is the main point) That book can only be lent out to ONE person at a time, the Library doesn't make infinite copies of the book that can be lent out simultaneously for free.

How much of a difference is that, really? Is it not just a technicality, a feature of the traditional medium of books and their difficulty to reproduce?

Ok, so library buys a book (money to publisher and maybe writer), I borrow the book (no money changes hands), I read it and I return it. Fine, right? Maybe someone else wants it, recalls it, I only have a week or so with it.

On the flip side, someone buys a game (money to publishers and maybe some to the devs), shares the game on the interwebs, I download it (hypothetically speaking) (no money changes hands), I play it, finish it and uninstall it. In all likely hood I complete it inside of a week, and as shared games rarely support multiplayer there's no need to keep it on my hard drive.

Now, take a step back and tell me what the difference is. The same amount of money changes hands - a single copy is purchased. The only difference is that you may have to wait a week to get a copy from a library. And you will have to leave your house to get the book.

So, the only real-world difference is convenience? Is the whole 'anti-piracy' thing just a sense of entitlement from the games industry that their medium deserves to be purchased at full price for every copy? Personally, I challenge that attitude.

 

[Tipsy Giant]

I'm torn, really.
On the one hand, awesome for freedom and all, on the other hand, artists can't make money off of things only a few people buy and the rest lend... or can they?

Maybe I'm looking at this all wrong.

Artists make no money from recordings FACT!!!!

 

[Wicky_42]

I'm curious, how does file sharing different from piracy?

Isn't piracy just a form of file sharing?

Piracy is the name given to file-sharing copyrighted material. Simple as. So yeah, the Spanish judges support piracy.

 

[Wicky_42]

Well God damn it.

Frankly, I don't see it as lending books, unless you could magically xerox an entire book in five minutes indefinitely for all of your friends whenever you felt like it.

Or, say, went to a library and borrowed whatever you wanted, and read it without even paying for it! And then your friend borrowed it from the library and read it without even paying for it!!

Ok, sure, you're not reading the same book at the same time (well, unless they have multiple copies), but unless it was a really good book you're not going to need to re-read it in the four week or so that he's got it out for, and if you do, you can just recall it.

There's very little real-world difference between that and playing through a shared game (just without needing to wait to replay it, if it's really good) - it's just a matter of convenience. That's literally it. (ooh, pun. kinda, heh)

 

[Booze Zombie]

Artists make no money from recordings FACT!!!!

So, artists are boned, either way? Poor dudes...

 

[Credge]

Despite agreeing with their ruling, I don't agree with their logic.

When you loan a book, you're no longer using it, completely unable render its uses.

I can send my friend a file and we can both use the same file at the same time. It's really not the same as sharing a book.

 

[bismarck55]

I hope some big wigs in the industries followed this case. And I hope they decide to end piracy since obviously they aren't going to find any legal help whatsoever. Just shut her down. Oh that big game you have been waiting for is set to be released next month? Haha not anymore. Maybe that would put an end to this piracy doesn't hurt anyone nonsense when it starts hurting all of us.

I don't like to insult people, so I won't, but I feel like I would be doing you a disservice if I didn't let you know that this post makes no sense.

First of all, no "bigwig" wants piracy, you've heard of DRM right? (you can't really use this site without hearing about it constantly) that's them trying to end it.

Secondly, if they prevented piracy by not releasing games anymore, how would that be beneficial to them? They'd be saying "HAHA! No more piracy....wait...FUCK! WE HAVE NO SOURCE OF INCOME ANYMORE!!!"

Your solution is akin to ending AIDS by blowing up the Earth, sure it ends it, but it destroys everything that made it relevant, and caused a much more massive problem than it solved.

I am well aware of how that would play out. I know that you would be cutting of the leg in hopes of saving the toe. I also know it would never happen. I just find it somewhat depressing that this is the only hope they have left of ending piracy. And frankly incorporating ridiculous DRMs is not doing them much more good than just closing the doors down. Just look what it has done to Ubisoft's reputation.

I think you managed to actually damage my brain with those posts... You want all video game related business everywhere to shut down, for no other reason than to prevent some people from getting free games? What? How does that make any sense? At all?

 

[thethingthatlurks]

Arr me maties, you heard the judges. Fly the Jolly Roger, and set sail for the Bay of Pirates. We be plundering' tonight!

(not that I live in Spain, or support piracy-stupid term btw, but I do support freedom online. File sharing is indeed not necessarily the same as stealing, and there definitely should be no regulation)

 

[Danpascooch]

I hope some big wigs in the industries followed this case. And I hope they decide to end piracy since obviously they aren't going to find any legal help whatsoever. Just shut her down. Oh that big game you have been waiting for is set to be released next month? Haha not anymore. Maybe that would put an end to this piracy doesn't hurt anyone nonsense when it starts hurting all of us.

I don't like to insult people, so I won't, but I feel like I would be doing you a disservice if I didn't let you know that this post makes no sense.

First of all, no "bigwig" wants piracy, you've heard of DRM right? (you can't really use this site without hearing about it constantly) that's them trying to end it.

Secondly, if they prevented piracy by not releasing games anymore, how would that be beneficial to them? They'd be saying "HAHA! No more piracy....wait...FUCK! WE HAVE NO SOURCE OF INCOME ANYMORE!!!"

Your solution is akin to ending AIDS by blowing up the Earth, sure it ends it, but it destroys everything that made it relevant, and caused a much more massive problem than it solved.

I am well aware of how that would play out. I know that you would be cutting of the leg in hopes of saving the toe. I also know it would never happen. I just find it somewhat depressing that this is the only hope they have left of ending piracy. And frankly incorporating ridiculous DRMs is not doing them much more good than just closing the doors down. Just look what it has done to Ubisoft's reputation.

Or they could just live with the fact that some Piracy is going to happen, and stop making DRM that DRIVES PEOPLE TO PIRACY! Thus raising their profits by cutting out an expensive piece of development while simultaneously lowering piracy rates.